Channon v. Liberation Distribution LLC

CourtDistrict Court, D. New Mexico
DecidedApril 23, 2025
Docket1:24-cv-01124
StatusUnknown

This text of Channon v. Liberation Distribution LLC (Channon v. Liberation Distribution LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Mexico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Channon v. Liberation Distribution LLC, (D.N.M. 2025).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

MATTHEW CHANNON,

Plaintiff,

vs. Civ. No. 24-1124 WJ/SCY

LIBERATION DISTRIBUTION, LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER SETTING CASE MANAGEMENT DEADLINES AND DISCOVERY PARAMETERS

THIS MATTER came before the Court on a Rule 16 scheduling conference held on April 23, 2025. The Court reviewed the attorneys’ Joint Status Report and Provisional Discovery Plan (Doc. 33), and after conferring with counsel, adopts it as modified in this order. The Court will permit the following discovery:1 a) Maximum of 25 Interrogatories by each party to any other party; b) Maximum of 25 Requests for Admission by each party to any other party; c) Maximum of 25 Requests for Production by each party to any other party; d) Maximum of 5 Depositions per side; and e) Depositions are limited to 7 hours unless extended by agreement of the parties.

1 Service of interrogatories, requests for production, or requests for admission shall be considered timely only if the responses are due prior to the deadline. A notice to take a deposition shall be considered timely only if the deposition takes place prior to the discovery deadline.

All opposed discovery-related motions—including those not covered by D.N.M.LR-Civ. 26.6, such as motions to compel related to depositions or motions for a protective order under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)—must be filed within 21 days of the disclosure, response, answer, or objection that is the subject of the motion, unless the parties agree to extend this deadline or the Court extends the deadline. The Court expects the parties to liberally agree to extend this deadline when the parties are actively engaged in communication to resolve the dispute. The Court has set the following case management deadlines: a) Deadline for Plaintiff to move to add additional parties and to amend pleadings’: May 15, 2025 b) Deadline for Defendant to move to add additional parties and to amend pleadings”: June 16, 2025 c) Plaintiff’s Rule 26(a)(2) expert disclosure?: July 1, 2025 d) Defendant’s Rule 26(a)(2) expert disclosure’: August 1, 2025 e) Termination date for discovery: October 1, 2025 f) Motions relating to discovery to be filed by: October 22, 2025 g) Pretrial motions other than discovery motions’ filed by: October 31, 2025 Any extension of the case management deadlines must be approved by the Court. Any requests for additional discovery must be submitted to the Court by motion prior to the expiration of the discovery.

STEVEN YARBROUGH United Stafes Magistrate Jud ? Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 requires that the Court set a deadline for amendment of pleadings and joinder of parties. A party seeking to amend the pleadings after the above dates must both demonstrate good cause to amend the scheduling order as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) and satisfy the requirements for amendment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a). See, e.g., Gorsuch Ltd., B.C. v. Wells Fargo Nat’l Bank Ass’n, 771 F.3d 1230, 1242 (10th Cir. 2014). > Parties must disclose the names of all expert witnesses, including treating physicians, the subject matter on which the experts will present evidence, and a summary of the facts and opinions to which the experts are expected to testify by this date. Experts who are retained or specifically employed to provide expert testimony must also submit an expert report by this date. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2). The parties must have their retained expert(s) ready to be deposed at the time they identify them and provide their reports. Expert witnesses who are not required to provide a written report may be deposed before summary disclosure. This deadline applies to motions related to the admissibility of experts or expert testimony that may require a Daubert hearing, but otherwise does not apply to motions in limine. The presiding judge will set a motions in limine deadline in a separate order. The Court will set pretrial order deadlines following the filing of dispositive motions or, if no motions are filed, following the deadline to file dispositive motions.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Channon v. Liberation Distribution LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/channon-v-liberation-distribution-llc-nmd-2025.